Reflection on Weapons Carry

Bill Mattocks

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
4,429
Location
Michigan
Some simple thoughts that have been peculating in my punkin haid for some time now...especially as I am embarking on a new set of martial arts weapons training. I do enjoy weapons and training with them.

One thinks of a weapon as an advantage in a self-defense situation, and to be sure, it is. But I believe that there are also disadvantages involved in weapons carry.

First, if one has a weapon, one must protect that weapon from being taken away and used against one. Whether it is a gun, a knife, a bludgeon, or whatever; nearly any weapon that one can carry can be used against one if it is seized by an aggressor.

Second, nearly all weapons one might carry could potentially be considered capable of inflicting deadly force, at least in legal terms and in the USA (I do not know the laws of every jurisdiction, I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, etc). However, it is my belief and understanding that one may only legally resort to deadly force when one is authorized to do so; for example when legitimately in fear of one's life.

Third, a weapon, as many here know but some may not, is not a magic wand. One does not pull it out, wave it around, and things get better. In general, once a weapon is brandished, the chances that it will have to be used become much, much, higher. In other words, even if a given confrontation was not life-threatening, by introducing a weapon, now it is. And that may not be a good idea, depending on the circumstances.

Fourth, weapons in general require proficiency to be anything other than a dangerous detriment to the person carrying them. A knife, a gun, even a taser or pepper spray. One gains little advantage from depositing them in a purse or glove box or carrying them in a pocket if one has no particular experience using them. As a former Military Policeman, we took part in extensive training with our weapons, including spraying each other directly in the face with Mace (before pepper spray). We did our best to become and remain proficient with our weapons, and we used them constantly in self-defense situations (Marines in garrison, what can you expect?). I do not think most civilians practice to obtain that level of proficiency.

Fifth, the willingness to use a weapon to take a life. I suspect that most people who carry weapons have not thought a lot about what happens when you take a human life, or they don't think (or want to think) that the weapon they choose to carry might end a life, or that they would employ it in that manner.

I am not trying to say that one should not defend one's life with deadly force if the need arises. I am saying that I don't think many people have through through what it means to do so. To intentionally end a human life is more than pulling a trigger. There will be blood, brains, fecal matter, urine, vomit, and the general chaos that ensues after such an event. Even if justified in killing a human being, there will police, questions, lawyers, and expenses. There will almost always be emotion and financial costs. Still better than being dead oneself, true. But I would hope that no one seriously thinks they can blow away a mugger (for example) and tell the cops what happened and that's that, end of story. Your life will change, forever, starting at that moment, and in many ways not for the better, other than the major upside of still being alive.

I can well imagine a scenario where a person becomes involved in a dispute which becomes physical. Given our current times, perhaps a road rage incident or a fight over a parking spot or some such thing. Words are exchanged, neither party backs down, someone throws a punch.

Now, if I am the person being punched, of course I will defend myself. But if I am carrying, say, a gun, now I have to worry that the person punching me will tackle me or knock me down and somehow gain possession of that gun. Now my focus it not just on defending myself, but also defending the gun. And if I defend my possession of that gun by drawing it, now the chances are much higher that I am going to end up using it, or having it used on me. My attention is divided, and my hand or hands may end up being occupied with the weapon itself, which is of no actual use to me until and unless I am obligated to take a life to save my own.

I will add a few more things.

It appears to me that there are many who seem to have a preoccupation with the notion of carrying weapons they can 'get away with' in terms of not having them considered to be weapons by law enforcement. In my opinion, this is dangerous thinking. I only worked in law enforcement for a short time and I only studied Criminal Justice in college for a few years, but I did manage to absorb some basic understanding that has served me well over the years. For example, it's not what the item is, it's how you use it. A screwdriver is a screwdriver, until it's used as a weapon and the person who was carrying it INTENDED to use it for that purpose. Then is it a deadly weapon. I'm sorry, there's no way around this. All the various items that companies make with the idea that they will be mistaken for innocuous items and not weapons, but which are intended to be employed as weapons, they won't pass muster if one actually purchases them with the intent to use them as weapons and then does so. There are no cheats that work. Sorry.

Most controversially, I will add that in my experience, there are some people who seem to have either what I would consider an unhealthy obsession with weapons or a tendency to engage in magical thinking about what weapons do for a person. I do not suspect that such people are going to gain any advantage at all if they carry weapons about for the purposes of self-defense.

That's all I have for now. Feel free to comment. I am not against weapons carry, I support the right to carry, I like firearms, and I of course support the right to defend oneself, even with deadly force, when and as required. I have no sympathy for criminals. I am merely trying to take a clear-eyed look at the reasons we carry, what we carry, how we carry, and whether or not that is always a good idea for general self-defense.
 

Flatfish

Black Belt
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
679
Reaction score
296
A very thoughtful post. I agree with much of what you said.
 

Dirty Dog

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
23,355
Reaction score
9,095
Location
Pueblo West, CO
Bill, I'm not going to respond to most of your post simply because I'm sitting at the airport in Indianapolis on my phone and it's too painful. When I get home...

While a weapon isn't a magic wand, it IS true that in about 3 out of 4 cases, merely drawing a gun will end a conflict without a shot being fired.



Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
23,337
Reaction score
8,070
Bill, I'm not going to respond to most of your post simply because I'm sitting at the airport in Indianapolis on my phone and it's too painful. When I get home...

While a weapon isn't a magic wand, it IS true that in about 3 out of 4 cases, merely drawing a gun will end a conflict without a shot being fired.



Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Not TapaTalk. Really.

Are these really true? Or just full caps true.

Now you can make a couple of interesting conclusions but you are statistically more likley to be shot if you carry according to one of a very small amount of studies done on the ,subject.

Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault
 
Last edited:

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
23,337
Reaction score
8,070
OP
Bill Mattocks

Bill Mattocks

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
4,429
Location
Michigan
Really was not my intent to ignite a gun debate. If that's what this is to become, I withdraw from the thread.
 

Flatfish

Black Belt
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
679
Reaction score
296
Maybe one thing to add to the discussion would be the potential to inadvertently harm innocent bystanders (use of projectile weapons).

Personally that would be very hard to deal with even if the weapon was used for all the right reasons.
 
OP
Bill Mattocks

Bill Mattocks

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
4,429
Location
Michigan
Maybe one thing to add to the discussion would be the potential to inadvertently harm innocent bystanders (use of projectile weapons).

Personally that would be very hard to deal with even if the weapon was used for all the right reasons.

I think that is a valid concern for those who carry firearms.

To everyone else:

To try to bring this discussion back to where I had originally hoped it would go, though, let me try this...

Let's pretend that firearms are not part of the discussion. Edged weapons, bludgeons of various sorts, chemical and electrical weapons only. I hope my points are still the same, but without the added dynamic of the pro and anti gun arguments.

If I happen to carry a (let's say) collapsible baton on my person for self-defense purposes, I still have to defend not just my own life, but my possession of that weapon. I have to keep control of it lest it be used against me. It also changes the dynamic of a self-defense situation the moment it is brandished. It is also not a magic wand in the sense that it ends trouble by merely being waved about. Etc.

Could we all agree to just leave the firearm debate out of this particular thread? My reflections were really more of a meditation on the possible downsides as well as the advantages to carrying weapons for self-defense, not the right and wrong of guns.
 

Dinkydoo

Purple Belt
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
397
Reaction score
106
Really was not my intent to ignite a gun debate. If that's what this is to become, I withdraw from the thread.
You mentioned guns 7 times in the OP and were talking about lives being taken by firearms.
 
OP
Bill Mattocks

Bill Mattocks

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
15,624
Reaction score
4,429
Location
Michigan
You mentioned guns 7 times in the OP and were talking about lives being taken by firearms.

Then do as you wish. I did not intend a political discussion about the pros and cons of firearms. I am out of this thread.
 

Dinkydoo

Purple Belt
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
397
Reaction score
106
Then do as you wish. I did not intend a political discussion about the pros and cons of firearms. I am out of this thread.
*Launches toys from the pram*

Get a grip man, it was a clip from a comedy show. I have no desire to get into a full blown gun debate either.

As you were
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
23,337
Reaction score
8,070
Maybe one thing to add to the discussion would be the potential to inadvertently harm innocent bystanders (use of projectile weapons).

Personally that would be very hard to deal with even if the weapon was used for all the right reasons.

If you have pulled out a gun shot at someone missed and hit some innocent bystander then then it was not used for the right reasons.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
23,337
Reaction score
8,070
Weapons in any form are a serious responsibility. You have a duty to be of decent character. Should be proficient in its use,understand the law and be able to protect that weapon against loss or theft.

It should be the same as if you are walking around with a hundred thousand dollars in your pocket.
 

Flatfish

Black Belt
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
679
Reaction score
296
If you have pulled out a gun shot at someone missed and hit some innocent bystander then then it was not used for the right reasons.


Yeah, I think you are oversimplifying here...there's plenty of scenarios where an innocent person could be hit and you would not have absolute control over that in a SD situation but I'm not going to argue about this.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
23,337
Reaction score
8,070
Yeah, I think you are oversimplifying here...there's plenty of scenarios where an innocent person could be hit and you would not have absolute control over that in a SD situation but I'm not going to argue about this.

You just did argue about it.
 

GiYu - Todd

Green Belt
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
156
Reaction score
87
Location
Dayton, Ohio
Most jurisdictions look at "disparity of force" regarding application of weapons.
If facing an unarmed attacker, you rarely are justified using a weapon... with exceptions if you are handicapped or much smaller than the attacker. If the attacker has a bludgeon or dangerous, but not fully leathal (from a jury standpoint, not from a real damage standpoint) weapon, and you have both a non-leathal weapon and a gun, you often are expected to resort to the less-lethal option first. However, if you only have a firearm, and the attacker has a dangerous (but supposedly non-lethal) weapon, you may be justified escalating to the gun since that keeps you from being at a significant disadvantage.
A big thing to keep in mind is whatever you do to an attacker (even if you just beat the hell out of them unarmed), you have a real chance of facing legal challenges to your decision, where jurists (sitting comfortably in a nice safe room) may decide that what you did was excessive.
 

Tony Dismukes

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
7,576
Reaction score
7,611
Location
Lexington, KY
When I was younger I used to sometimes carry a weapon of some sort on my person. These days I generally don't.

My reasoning is that in 51 years of life I have yet to be involved in a situation where having a lethal weapon on me would have been likely to improve the outcome. I have been in several situations where having a gun or knife on me might easily have made the situation worse.

These days I am much less likely to be involved in a violent or potentially violent situation than I was in my younger days, so my need for having lethal force available to me is much less. If something about my life circumstances were to change so that I thought I was likely to need that option, then I would consider carrying something. However I would do so fully aware of the risks and responsibilities attendant on that decision.
 

Latest Discussions

Top